Ron Paul: I’m worried that the government might kill Edward Snowden with a drone

This just reinforces my opinion that this whole "Snowden" deal is manufactured story.

You have politicians from the left and right being paraded in the media talking about the legality of the spying programs.

Poles calling Snowden a traitor.

Poles stating these circumventions of the fourth amendment are necessary to keep us safe.

Now we have a Pew poll that "proves" most Americans are "just fine" with the illegal snooping.

Finally we have the good Dr. on his megaphone worrying about a drone attack on our hero, whistleblower.

Come on, People. The media and the government are partners. This has been contrived to let everyone that didn't already know they are spying on all
Americans. It's purpose is to normalize the behavior in the public's eye and to get everyone used to it.

That is my buck-fifty. I know I am one of the few here that think this way.

Sadly you are probably right. This story is starting to stink. If he is the real deal then he should be on the first flight to Iceland.

If this is a setup whoever thought it up is kinda stupid. It has opened a door that was closed and sealed shut. Now we will be debating about
privacy. And people want to be free. I don't care how many BS polls I see.

I worried too that he was Jimmy Hoffa'ed, but a friend brought me great peace with these words:"It was our Lord that gave him the wisdom and the
strength to speak out and because of that I know the Lord is watching over him."

That being said, I do believe Ron is well aware of drone capabilities and perhaps was just warning us or putting the idea of drone attacks in our
heads.

“When the drones get here, another Obama program, the drones are going to be awesome,” he warned.

“The drones will have scanning devices that can fly over your home and grab all the digital data in the place where you live. The drones are going
to up the ante, there’s no doubt about it. The only question is whether this is still the United States of America. There’s nowhere to hide
anymore.”

They were just talking about going after the reporter who broke the NSA leaks with the help of Edward Snowden. This is a dangerous presidence if
reporters are going to be held responsible for reporting possible illegal activity by the government. This is simply a strong armed tactic to keep
reporters at bay.

What reporter is going to risk exposing anything related to any questionable government programs? The free press is supposed to protect its people
from government tyranny. Where are the checks and balances here? This is alarming, because the last thing we want is a press that is controlled by
our government.

So a whistle-blower is now going to think twice, before he exposes any illegal or criminal activity on the part of our government? The last time I
checked, I lived in the United States of America. We have a constitution that protects our rights and freedom from a government over reaching their
authority.

Originally posted by WeRpeons
They were just talking about going after the reporter who broke the NSA leaks with the help of Edward Snowden. This is a dangerous presidence if
reporters are going to be held responsible for reporting possible illegal activity by the government. This is simply a strong armed tactic to keep
reporters at bay.

What reporter is going to risk exposing anything related to any questionable government programs? The free press is supposed to protect its people
from government tyranny. Where are the checks and balances here? This is alarming, because the last thing we want is a press that is controlled by
our government.

So a whistle-blower is now going to think twice, before he exposes any illegal or criminal activity on the part of our government? The last time I
checked, I lived in the United States of America. We have a constitution that protects our rights and freedom from a government over reaching their
authority.

And all from a president who preached "protect free press". Program is ruined now because of how they interpreted and then applied the patriot act.
It's not because of Snowden or the press. But wait - the government is never wrong. They are perfect

I have the same degree of confidence in poll results as is do with MSM and their official story.

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"

WTHeck, polls are meant to persuade the sheep that they have the wrong ideology and better change their thinking because they must be wrong if they
are in the minority. Sadly, this tool works and MSM knows it.

Government's got the goods on everybody - you, me, themselves and Pew.
Just sayin' there is more corruption in the world than we realize.

Then again, they could be accurately reflecting how successful the MSM has been in persuading public opinion.

I like to read the comments below articles and anybody that calls Snowden a traitor right now is getting jumped on big time. The comments are so foul
against Obama they lack full works. That's what I'm seeing from this chair.

If the crocks behind the government scandals with the NSA knows that they are full of dirt and Snowden have some of that dirt on them, you bet your
butt that they want him death.

or what you think that they are going to invite him for afternoon tea and cookies?

I'm sure they would like to squash him and his story. The thing is, he has already given his info to the Guardian. Perhaps that's why they want
Greenwald, or are attempting to make him fear them. It is too late to stop the leak. More dirt to come.

Killing either Snowden or Greenwald destroys any shred of credibility the government clings to and tells the world they are cold blooded killers as
well and spies gone wild.

They are hog tied and yes their only chance is to persuade public opinion in their favour.

It is media wars alright, but not just between U.S. and foreign nations. It is a war between the government and the awake citizens of this country
who have their number.

Paul was saying some good stuff there. It would have been nice if the anchor wouldn't have decided she should talk over him so we couldn't get his
full perspective. I will suppose/hope that she had to ask about whether or not he thought Snowdon was going to go to the Russians with the
information, but I got the impression that she was concerned herself. Did you see that too? Was I just misreading her?

This just reinforces my opinion that this whole "Snowden" deal is manufactured story.

it's possible, but i don't think it likely. i think the spin is manufactured, but i think he released those files absent of the government's will.

bradley manning leaked documents and he was labeled a traitor and slandered in much the same way. obviously the news is trying to convince people that
these programs are good and legal, but they're still hammering snowden.

fox news group "the five" ALWAYS has the unwanted opinion voiced by the one "democrat" in the group, they set him up as a strawman and fire away.
if he was not part of the group, there would be no discussion. he's supposedly liberal, yet he was the only one who thought the programs were bad.
they all said they would trade liberty for safety except him, and they grilled him for it. if i remember correctly, they also grilled him for
supporting leakers if the leaked information was about illegal activity.

Killing either Snowden or Greenwald destroys any shred of credibility the government clings to and tells the world they are cold blooded killers as
well and spies gone wild.

true, so if they're out to kill him, expect him to "disappear", and you'll hear the news say he has gone underground and detectives can't find
him anywhere (wanted for questioning and to insure china/russia doesn't "hurt" him of course). the story will be forgotten in a few weeks, and
people won't be left with the impression that the government assassinated him.

Originally posted by GrantedBail
This just reinforces my opinion that this whole "Snowden" deal is manufactured story.

You know, that's all I can really come up with as well considering the facets of the story itself.
It feels like it has feathers, it tastes like "Shaoyazi", waddles when it walks, and quacks....
I am thinking we have a water fowl here.

Keep up the posting GrantedBail, I am really digging what you have to say.

I have been watching your posts for awhile now, and I can't help but love hearing what you have to say time and time again.

That is my buck-fifty. I know I am one of the few here that think this way.

edit on 12-6-2013 by GrantedBail because: (no reason
given)

Isn't it messed up that even considering or speculating the possibility of a conspiracy is frowned upon mostly here at a conspiracy theory themed
website?

Myself, I find it frustrating and almost depressing at times.
I don't let that get me down, I just try to improve my approach.

It has been working out positively though, as I try to improve myself the ATS community has been very receptive and kind about it (social
reinforcement of my insanity? haha).

It's not that you "think this way", but rather it is that you are "questioning things" that don't seem to add up very well, and trying to find
out why it doesn't add up. What missing pieces explain all of this?

Your opinion is a result of having so many questions, but no real answers. It leads to it's own pre-defined conclusions, that we are essentially
slaves and we are constantly manipulated into consenting to it and requesting heavier chains.

Accidentally killing innocent civilians, so long a criticism of the American targeted killing program, would become a terrifying certainty in Hong
Kong. FATA suffers more drone strikes than anywhere except Afghanistan, and has a rough population density of 300 people per square mile. Hong Kong,
by contrast, has 17,000 people per square mile. It's unlikely a drone, flying above Hong Kong at 30,000 feet, could even locate Snowden in a
population that dense.
If a drone could find Snowden, it's reasonable to assume that that hundreds of innocent people would be killed or injured in the missile attack,
which almost certainly constitutes an act of war between the U.S. and China.

Hong Kong is probably an unsafe place for Snowden because of other
reasons, but death by American drone strike isn't something he has to worry about there.

Oh dear. Poor old irrelevant Ron Paul, the paranoid conspiracy theorist's friend. You can always rely on him for a whacky media statement.

Is Edward Snowden currently located in any country where the US is operating drones? Is there any evidence that the government wants him dead? Is
there any evidence that killing him would actually help the government in any way, considering the information he's leaked is already in the public
domain?

Seriously folks, let's get logical here please.

I like Mr. Paul's stance on things, generally speaking, but I'm going to have to side with you on him going into wacky land here. As for killing
Snowden though....given his position and former positions, yeah, I'd say they likely have some good reasons for wanting him dead...but they certainly
won't do it with a drone or cruise missile into Hong Kong.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.